Additional considerations are required when preparing a protocol for a systematic review with multiple interventions

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 83, Issue , 2017, Pages 65-74

  Chaimani, Anna ^a   Caldwell, Deborah M ^b   Li, Tianjing ^c   Higgins, Julian P T ^b   Salanti, Georgia ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Comparative effectiveness review; Eligibility criteria; Indirect comparison; Mixed treatment comparison; Network meta analysis; Transitivity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUTHOR; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); NETWORK META-ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STUDY DESIGN; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 85012918706     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.015     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. [1] Lee, A.W., Review of mixed treatment comparisons in published systematic reviews shows marked increase since 2009. J Clin Epidemiol 67 (2014), 138–143.
2. [2] Nikolakopoulou, A., Chaimani, A., Veroniki, A.A., Vasiliadis, H.S., Schmid, C.H., Salanti, G., Characteristics of networks of interventions: a description of a database of 186 published networks. PLoS One, 9(1), 2014, e86754.
3. [3] Salanti, G., Higgins, J.P., Ades, A.E., Ioannidis, J.P., Evaluation of networks of randomized trials. Stat Methods Med Res 17 (2008), 279–301.
4. [4] Dias, S., Welton, N.J., Sutton, A.J., Caldwell, D.M., Lu, G., Ades, A.E., Evidence synthesis for decision making 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making 33 (2013), 641–656.
5. [5] Dias, S., Sutton, A.J., Ades, A.E., Welton, N.J., Evidence synthesis for decision making 2: a generalized linear modeling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making 33 (2013), 607–617.
6. [6] Dias, S., Sutton, A.J., Welton, N.J., Ades, A.E., Evidence synthesis for decision making 3: heterogeneity–subgroups, meta-regression, bias, and bias-adjustment. Med Decis Making 33 (2013), 618–640.
7. [7] Caldwell, D.M., An overview of conducting systematic reviews with network meta-analysis. Syst Rev, 3(1), 2014, 109.
8. [8] Hutton, B., Salanti, G., Chaimani, A., Caldwell, D.M., Schmid, C., Thorlund, K., et al. The quality of reporting methods and results in network meta-analyses: an overview of reviews and suggestions for improvement. PLoS One, 9(3), 2014, e92508.
9. [9] Hutton, B., Salanti, G., Caldwell, D.M., Chaimani, A., Schmid, C.H., Cameron, C., et al. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of healthcare interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med 162 (2015), 777–784.
10. [10] Jansen, J.P., Trikalinos, T., Cappelleri, J.C., Daw, J., Andes, S., Eldessouki, R., et al. Indirect treatment comparison/network meta-analysis study questionnaire to assess relevance and credibility to inform health care decision making: an ISPOR-AMCP-NPC good practice task force report. Value Health 17 (2014), 157–173.
11. [11] Jansen, J.P., Fleurence, R., Devine, B., Itzler, R., Barrett, A., Hawkins, N., et al. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis for health-care decision making: report of the ISPOR task force on indirect treatment comparisons good research practices: part 1. Value Health 14 (2011), 417–428.
12. [12] Ades, A.E., Caldwell, D.M., Reken, S., Welton, N.J., Sutton, A.J., Dias, S., Evidence synthesis for decision making 7: a reviewer's checklist. Med Decis Making 33 (2013), 679–691.
13. [13] Higgins, J.P., Green, S., Guide to the contents of a Cochrane protocol and review. Higgins, J.P.T., Green, S., (eds.) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 2008, Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 51–79.
14. [14] Booth, A., Clarke, M., Dooley, G., Ghersi, D., Moher, D., Petticrew, M., et al. PROSPERO at one year: an evaluation of its utility. Syst Rev, 2(1), 2013, 4.
15. [15] Protocol template for a Cochrane intervention review that compares multiple interventions. Prepared by Anna Chaimani and Georgia Salanti and revised by Lorne Becker, Debbi Caldwell, Julian Higgins and Tianjing Li. Available at http://methods.cochrane.org/cmi/sites/methods.cochrane.org.cmi/files/uploads/Protocol%20for%20Cochrane%20Reviews%20with%20Multiple%20Interventions.pdf. Accessed February 3, 2015.
16. [16] Li, T., Puhan, M.A., Vedula, S.S., Singh, S., Dickersin, K., Ad Hoc Network Meta-analysis Methods Meeting Working Group. Network meta-analysis-highly attractive but more methodological research is needed. BMC Med, 9(1), 2011, 79.
17. [17] Cipriani, A., Higgins, J.P., Geddes, J.R., Salanti, G., Conceptual and technical challenges in network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 159 (2013), 130–137.
18. [18] Guaiana, G., Barbui, C., Caldwell, D., Davies, S., Furukawa, T., Imai, H., et al. Antidepressants, benzodiazepines and azapirones for panic disorder in adults: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 9, 2015, CD011567.
19. [19] Tricco, A.C., Cogo, E., Angeliki, V.A., Soobiah, C., Hutton, B., Hemmelgarn, B.R., et al. Comparative safety of anti-epileptic drugs among infants and children exposed in utero or during breastfeeding: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Syst Rev, 3, 2014, 68.
20. [20] Furukawa, T.A., Salanti, G., Atkinson, L.Z., Leucht, S., Ruhe, H.G., Turner, E.H., et al. Comparative efficacy and acceptability of first-generation and second-generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depression: protocol for a network meta-analysis. BMJ Open, 6(7), 2016, e010919.
21. [21] Caldwell, D.M., Ades, A.E., Higgins, J.P., Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ 331 (2005), 897–900.
22. [22] Salanti, G., Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multiple-treatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool. Res Synth Meth 3:2 (2012), 80–97.
23. [23] Harden, C.L., Meador, K.J., Pennell, P.B., Allen Hauser, W., Gronseth, G.S., French, J.A., et al. Management issues for women with epilepsy—focus on pregnancy (an evidence-based review): II. Teratogenesis and perinatal outcomes. Epilepsia 50:5 (2009), 1237–1246.
24. [24] Adab, N., Jacoby, A., Smith, D., Chadwick, D., Additional educational needs in children born to mothers with epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 70 (2001), 15–21.
25. [25] Adab, N., Kini, U., Vinten, J., Ayres, J., Baker, G., Clayton-Smith, J., et al. The longer term outcome of children born to mothers with epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 75 (2004), 1575–1583.
26. [26] Gaily, E., Kantola-Sorsa, E., Hiilesmaa, V., Isoaho, M., Matila, R., Kotila, M., et al. Normal intelligence in children with prenatal exposure to carbamazepine. Neurology 62 (2004), 28–32.
27. [27] Meador, K.J., Baker, G.A., Browning, N., Clayton-Smith, J., Combs-Cantrell, D.T., Cohen, M., et al. Cognitive function at 3 years of age after fetal exposure to antiepileptic drugs. N Engl J Med 360 (2009), 1597–1605.
28. [28] Reinisch, J.M., Sanders, S.A., Mortensen, E.L., Rubin, D.B., In utero exposure to phenobarbital and intelligence deficits in adult men. JAMA 274 (1995), 1518–1525.
29. [29] Morrow, J., Russell, A., Guthrie, E., Parsons, L., Robertson, I., Waddell, R., et al. Malformation risks of antiepileptic drugs in pregnancy: a prospective study from the UK Epilepsy and Pregnancy Register. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 77 (2006), 193–198.
30. [30] Holmes, L.B., Baldwin, E.J., Smith, C.R., Habecker, E., Glassman, L., Wong, S.L., et al. Increased frequency of isolated cleft palate in infants exposed to lamotrigine during pregnancy. Neurology 70 (2008), 2152–2158.
31. [31] Meador, K.J., Baker, G.A., Finnell, R.H., Kalayjian, L.A., Liporace, J.D., Loring, D.W., et al. In utero antiepileptic drug exposure: fetal death and malformations. Neurology 67 (2006), 407–412.
32. [32] Vajda, F.J.E., Hitchcock, A., Graham, J., Solinas, C., O'Brien, T.J., Lander, C.M., et al. Foetal malformations and seizure control: 52 months data of the Australian Pregnancy Registry. Eur J Neurol Off J Eur Fed Neurol Soc 13:6 (2006), 645–654.
33. [33] Meador, K.J., Penovich, P., Baker, G.A., Pennell, P.B., Bromfield, E., Pack, A., et al. Antiepileptic drug use in women of childbearing age. Epilepsy Behav EB 15:3 (2009), 339–343.
34. [34] Caldwell, D.M., Dias, S., Welton, N.J., Extending treatment networks in health technology assessment: how far should we go?. Value Health 18 (2015), 673–681.
35. [35] Cooper, N.J., Peters, J., Lai, M.C., Juni, P., Wandel, S., Palmer, S., et al. How valuable are multiple treatment comparison methods in evidence-based health-care evaluation?. Value Health 14 (2011), 371–380.
36. [36] Mills, E.J., Kanters, S., Thorlund, K., Chaimani, A., Veroniki, A.A., Ioannidis, J.P., The effects of excluding treatments from network meta-analyses: survey. BMJ, 347, 2013, f5195.
37. [37] Chaimani, A., Higgins, J.P.T., Mavridis, D., Spyridonos, P., Salanti, G., Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLoS One, 8(10), 2013, e76654.
38. [38] Giovane, C.D., Vacchi, L., Mavridis, D., Filippini, G., Salanti, G., Network meta-analysis models to account for variability in treatment definitions: application to dose effects. Stat Med 32 (2013), 25–39.
39. [39] Madan, J., Chen, Y.-F., Aveyard, P., Wang, D., Yahaya, I., Munafo, M., et al. Synthesis of evidence on heterogeneous interventions with multiple outcomes recorded over multiple follow-up times reported inconsistently: a smoking cessation case-study. J R Stat Soc Ser A 177:1 (2014), 295–314.
40. [40] Mosseri, J., Trinquart, L., Nizard, R., Ravaud, P., Meta-analysis of a complex network of non-pharmacological interventions: the example of femoral neck fracture. PLoS One, 11(1), 2016, e0146336.
41. [41] Cipriani, A., Furukawa, T.A., Salanti, G., Geddes, J.R., Higgins, J.P., Churchill, R., et al. Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 12 new-generation antidepressants: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis. Lancet 373 (2009), 746–758.
42. [42] Saldanha, I.J., Dickersin, K., Wang, X., Li, T., Outcomes in Cochrane systematic reviews addressing four common eye conditions: an evaluation of completeness and comparability. PLoS One, 9(10), 2014, e109400.
43. [43] Hawkins, N., Scott, D.A., Woods, B., How far do you go? Efficient searching for indirect evidence. Med Decis Making 29 (2009), 273–281.
44. [44] Li, T., Vedula, S.S., Hadar, N., Parkin, C., Lau, J., Dickersin, K., Innovations in data collection, management, and archiving for systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med 162 (2015), 287–294.
45. [45] Jansen, J.P., Naci, H., Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers. BMC Med, 11, 2013, 159.
46. [46] Rücker, G., Schwarzer, G., Ranking treatments in frequentist network meta-analysis works without resampling methods. BMC Med Res Methodol, 15, 2015, 58.
47. [47] Trinquart, L., Attiche, N., Bafeta, A., Porcher, R., Ravaud, P., Uncertainty in treatment rankings: reanalysis of network meta-analyses of randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 164 (2016), 666–673.
48. [48] Salanti, G., Ades, A.E., Ioannidis, J.P., Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol 64 (2011), 163–171.
49. [49] Tan, S.H., Cooper, N.J., Bujkiewicz, S., Welton, N.J., Caldwell, D.M., Sutton, A.J., Novel presentational approaches were developed for reporting network meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 67 (2014), 672–680.
50. [50] Kibret, T., Richer, D., Beyene, J., Bias in identification of the best treatment in a Bayesian network meta-analysis for binary outcome: a simulation study. Clin Epidemiol 6 (2014), 451–460.
51. [51] Franchini, A.J., Dias, S., Ades, A.E., Jansen, J.P., Welton, N.J., Accounting for correlation in network meta-analysis with multi-arm trials. Res Synth Meth 3:2 (2012), 142–160.
52. [52] Spineli, L.M., Higgins, J.P., Cipriani, A., Leucht, S., Salanti, G., Evaluating the impact of imputations for missing participant outcome data in a network meta-analysis. Clin Trials 10 (2013), 378–388.
53. [53] Mavridis, D., White, I.R., Higgins, J.P.T., Cipriani, A., Salanti, G., Allowing for uncertainty due to missing continuous outcome data in pairwise and network meta-analysis. Stat Med 34 (2015), 721–741.
54. [54] Deeks, J.J., Higgins, J.P., Altman, D.G., Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. Higgins, J.P.T., Green, S., (eds.) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 2008, Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 243–296.
55. [55] Taylor, D.M., Cornelius, V., Smith, L., Young, A.H., Comparative efficacy and acceptability of drug treatments for bipolar depression: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis. Acta Psychiatr Scand 130:6 (2014), 452–469.
56. [56] Wijkstra, J., Lijmer, J., Burger, H., Geddes, J., Nolen, W.A., Pharmacological treatment for psychotic depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(11), 2013, CD004044.
57. [57] Barbui, C., Cipriani, A., Patel, V., Ayuso-Mateos, J.L., van Ommeren, M., Efficacy of antidepressants and benzodiazepines in minor depression: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry J Ment Sci 198:1 (2011), 11–16 sup 1.
58. [58] Fournier, J.C., De Rubeis, R.J., Hollon, S.D., Dimidjian, S., Amsterdam, J.D., Shelton, R.C., et al. Antidepressant drug effects and depression severity: a patient-level meta-analysis. JAMA 303 (2010), 47–53.
59. [59] Gibbons, R.D., Hur, K., Brown, C.H., Davis, J.M., Mann, J.J., Benefits from antidepressants: synthesis of 6-week patient-level outcomes from double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials of fluoxetine and venlafaxine. Arch Gen Psychiatry 69 (2012), 572–579.
60. [60] Khan, A., Kolts, R.L., Thase, M.E., Krishnan, K.R.R., Brown, W., Research design features and patient characteristics associated with the outcome of antidepressant clinical trials. Am J Psychiatry 161:11 (2004), 2045–2049.
61. [61] Salanti, G., Marinho, V., Higgins, J.P., A case study of multiple-treatments meta-analysis demonstrates that covariates should be considered. J Clin Epidemiol 62 (2009), 857–864.
62. [62] Rutherford, B.R., Sneed, J.R., Roose, S.P., Does study design influence Outcome? The effects of placebo control and treatment duration in antidepressant trials. Psychother Psychosom 78:3 (2009), 172–181.
63. [63] Sinyor, M., Levitt, A.J., Cheung, A.H., Schaffer, A., Kiss, A., Dowlati, Y., et al. Does inclusion of a placebo arm influence response to active antidepressant treatment in randomized controlled trials? Results from pooled and meta-analyses. J Clin Psychiatry 71:3 (2010), 270–279.
64. [64] White, I.R., Barrett, J.K., Jackson, D., Higgins, J.P.T., Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression. Res Synth Meth 3:2 (2012), 111–125.
65. [65] Lu, G., Ades, A.E., Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med 23 (2004), 3105–3124.
66. [66] Jackson, D., Barrett, J.K., Rice, S., White, I.R., Higgins, J.P.T., A design-by-treatment interaction model for network meta-analysis with random inconsistency effects. Stat Med 33 (2014), 3639–3654.
67. [67] Salanti, G., Del Giovane, C., Chaimani, A., Caldwell, D.M., Higgins, J.P.T., Evaluating the quality of evidence from a network meta-analysis. PLoS One, 9(7), 2014, e99682.
68. [68] Bucher, H.C., Guyatt, G.H., Griffith, L.E., Walter, S.D., The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol 50 (1997), 683–691.
69. [69] Dias, S., Welton, N.J., Caldwell, D.M., Ades, A.E., Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Stat Med 29 (2010), 932–944.
70. [70] Lu, G., Ades, A.E., Assessing evidence inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons. J Amer Statist Assoc 101:474 (2006), 447–459.
71. [71] Higgins, J.P.T., Jackson, D., Barrett, J.K., Lu, G., Ades, A.E., White, I.R., Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Res Synth Meth 3:2 (2012), 98–110.
72. [72] Donegan, S., Williamson, P., D'Alessandro, U., Tudur Smith, C., Assessing key assumptions of network meta-analysis: a review of methods. Res Synth Meth 4:4 (2013), 291–323.
73. [73] Song, F., Xiong, T., Parekh-Bhurke, S., Loke, Y.K., Sutton, A.J., Eastwood, A.J., et al. Inconsistency between direct and indirect comparisons of competing interventions: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ, 343, 2011, d4909.
74. [74] Veroniki, A.A., Vasiliadis, H.S., Higgins, J.P., Salanti, G., Evaluation of inconsistency in networks of interventions. Int J Epidemiol 42 (2013), 332–345.
75. [75] Egger, M., Davey Smith, G., Schneider, M., Minder, C., Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315 (1997), 629–634.
76. [76] Copas, J., What works?: selectivity models and meta-analysis. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc 162:1 (1999), 95–109.
77. [77] Mavridis, D., Sutton, A., Cipriani, A., Salanti, G., A fully Bayesian application of the Copas selection model for publication bias extended to network meta-analysis. Stat Med 32 (2013), 51–66.
78. [78] Mavridis, D., Welton, N.J., Sutton, A., Salanti, G., A selection model for accounting for publication bias in a full network meta-analysis. Stat Med 33 (2014), 5399–5412.
79. [79] Chaimani, A., Salanti, G., Using network meta-analysis to evaluate the existence of small-study effects in a network of interventions. Res Synth Meth 3:2 (2012), 161–176.
80. [80] Peters, J.L., Sutton, A.J., Jones, D.R., Abrams, K.R., Rushton, L., Contour-enhanced meta-analysis funnel plots help distinguish publication bias from other causes of asymmetry. J Clin Epidemiol 61 (2008), 991–996.
81. [81] Chaimani, A., Vasiliadis, H.S., Pandis, N., Schmid, C.H., Welton, N.J., Salanti, G., Effects of study precision and risk of bias in networks of interventions: a network meta-epidemiological study. Int J Epidemiol 42 (2013), 1120–1131.
82. [82] Cooper, N.J., Sutton, A.J., Morris, D., Ades, A.E., Welton, N.J., Addressing between-study heterogeneity and inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons: application to stroke prevention treatments in individuals with non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation. Stat Med 28 (2009), 1861–1881.
83. [83] Greenberg, P.E., Kessler, R.C., Birnbaum, H.G., Leong, S.A., Lowe, S.W., Berglund, P.A., et al. The economic burden of depression in the United States: how did it change between 1990 and 2000?. J Clin Psychiatry 64:12 (2003), 1465–1475.
84. [84] Papakostas, G.I., Fava, M., Does the probability of receiving placebo influence clinical trial outcome? A meta-regression of double-blind, randomized clinical trials in MDD. J Eur Coll Neuropsychopharmacol 19:1 (2009), 34–40.
85. [85] Guyatt, G., Oxman, A.D., Akl, E.A., Kunz, R., Vist, G., Brozek, J., et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction—GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol 64 (2011), 383–394.
86. [86] Puhan, M.A., Schünemann, H.J., Murad, M.H., Li, T., Brignardello-Petersen, R., Singh, J.A., et al. A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis. BMJ, 349, 2014, g5630.